Author: Emmett O'Connell (Page 94 of 176)

LDs rebel and another party thought

May 6, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

The 36th District Executive board met last Thursday and decided that the use of a handful of PCOs, some of whom were appointed, was too undemocratic a way to choose a party nominee when there were so many thousands of people interested in the political process this cycle.

Interesting note on the role of parties:

And state law does not allow nominations or endorsements by interest groups, political action committees, political parties, labor unions, editorial boards or other private organizations to be printed on the ballot.

Up until now, political parties have served a quasi-public role in elections. While they were private organizations with free association rights, the nominees that they chose appeared on the general election ballot. But, now the secretary of state has put them with other private organizations that are involved in elections.

Washington State DOT does not use forced labor

May 2, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

I wonder whyyyyyyy Washington State can’t get such a good deal on construction projects as the People’s Republic of China?? It is simply baffling.

At least to Michael Ennis at the Washington Policy Center:

Can someone explain why China can build a 6-lane, 22 mile bridge for $1.7 billion, but Washington leaders can’t build a 6-lane 520 span between 405 and I-5 for less than $4 billion?

I’m just going to assume that a Chinese concrete guy doesn’t make nearly as much, or enjoy the same labor protections, as a union concrete guy from Burien.

From “One Year of My Blood” Exploitation of Migrant Construction Workers in Beijing:

Once hired, the lives of migrant construction workers, like those of most migrant workers in Beijing, become closely tied to their employer. Employers generally house construction workers in dormitory-style dwellings on the construction site or nearby and provide meals for the workers at food canteens in exchange for a daily wage deduction of seven to 10 Yuan (US$0.93 to US$1.33). The majority of the workers we interviewed complained that the quantity and quality of the food provided by their employers was inadequate to sustain them for their daily long hours of hard physical labor.

And a press release on the report:

“[We] workers ended up with less than 20 Yuan (US$2.67) per day, and on top of that we’d be deducted eight Yuan (US$1.07) per day for living costs; how are workers supposed to survive [on such low wages]?”

That’s the ticket to our state’s transportation problem!

Sandra Romero nominated by Thurston County Democrats

April 29, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Sandra Romero was nominated earlier tonight by a vote of 77 to 63. Its a sham and a shame, but its something we do now.

I got there late, but here are my notes from tonight. I’ll hopefully get some time tomorrow to distill my thoughts down. Ignore the typos please:

Turns out I wasn’t too late, walked in about 7:30 and John Cusick was still getting through the “why exactly we’re doing this again?”

Guy Hoyle Dobson made a valient effort. Weird, I usually disagree with anything Guy has to say, but he made the point of the weird difference between a nomination and an endorsment.

Another lady named Virginia, a PCO, made the point that the state party shouldn’t be telling us what to do. We made a resolution from the floor that we wouldn’t endorse before the primary during the convention and now it looks like we’re going the other way.

Commissioner district 1, Cathy Wolfe nominated by acclimation. I tried to vote no, but it went quicker than I expected.

A few minutes of clearing up everyone in District 2 had the right colored cards. That’s how we do credentials in Thurston County, you lift up a different colored card depending on whether you’re a PCO, member (and for tonight) where you live. Second district PCOs have blue cards, District 1, pink and PCOs, smaller green cards. So, to keep that straight, I have a pink and green card. The people seeing the real action tonight have blue (district 2) and green (PCOs).

One of the things we didn’t really talk about tonight is that someone else could have (theoretically speaking) stood up and stolen the nomination from Cathy, Sandra and John.

John Halvorson talks first. “Who’s ready to vote Democrat!?!?” Yeaaaah says everyone. Then he goes into a pretty basic schpeal:

He’s experienced, he’s been elected before, he’s lived here a long time. Almost every county official in this courthouse has endorsed me.

Sandra and I like each other today, we’ll like each other tomorrow and tomorrow we’ll still be Democrats.

Romero speaks second.

Legislative experience, working in the joint Transportation committee. We need more than roads, we need alternatives.

We need to make sure we don’t become everywhere else USA. This is why I support Sandra, she worked so hard with the livable Thurston Campaign. She isn’t just running on experience or who she knows, but rather what exactly she’s going to do.

Circle name and sign on the back. Not a secret ballot.

Ironically, Fred Finn got the real endorsement/nomination whatever of the Thurston County Democrats by getting campaign services.

Sandra wins the nomination. What was the vote?

I want to thank both candidates for putting up with this rushed and unanticipated thing we had to do tonight.

We voted not to report the vote.

What’s likely going to happen tonight (Thurston County Dems nominating mess/sham)

April 28, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Olympian, PolitickerWA, and Politics is a blood sport are all writing about this incredibly cynical mess.

Though PIABS says the Olympian does a good job explaining things, Brad Shannon actually trips up at a few places:

Halvorson and Romero both say they’ll abide by the results and do the best they can. And later, if both survive the primary to meet in the general election, both can seek the formal endorsement of the local party. If I understand this right, both could be endorsed.

Thurston County Democrats don’t endorse. Though we do nominate (for some reason) we don’t endorse anyone. We do offer campaign services, and often times (even in non-partisan races) we offer campaign services (which could mean money) to more than one candidate in the same race, but we don’t endorse.

He did get this part right:

Last month, the U.S. Supreme Court let that primary become the law — while allowing for future challenges of the runoff primary system if political parties can show voters are confused or parties are damaged.

And that’s what this crazy nomination process is all about: preserving party standing to sue if they don’t like the results after the Aug. 19 primary.

We’re doing this tonight not for the sake of democracy, but to sue. We could have done the right thing, but we’re not.

So, what we’re going to end up doing is nominating either Halvorson or Romero. And that candidate will not actually gain much in the nomination. Probably, though, the public reaction to the nomination will damage the winner more than the loser.

I’ll be voting in the District 1 nominating election and will vote no (though we only have one choice) simply because I don’t like what’s going on.

King County board votes to study IRV

April 25, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

IRV folks have been pushing for a charter amendment in King County for the past few months, similar to the path taken in Pierce County. The charter review commission moved to suggest the county study IRV instead.

Not really a win, but not an all out loss either. Looks like Pierce County is still the pioneer. This fall with the Top Two/IRV taste test will be interesting:

Via email:

Hi folks this is to let you know that last night we won a modest but significant victory on the road to opening up our voting system to more voices and choices through using Instant Runoff Voting (IRV), also known as Ranked Choice Voting (RCV) in King County. The King County Charter Review Commission, a group of citizens appointed every 10 years to recommend changes in the County’s Charter, voted 16-1 to ask the King County Council to form a citizens task force to investigate whether we should put an initiative in support of IRV for County Elections of the ballot in King County. The recommendation is for the citizens’s task force to be convened in January 2010 and to make a recommendation about the advisability of an IRV initiative by the end of the year.

Of course, we would have preferred something much stronger, we were urging the commission to recommend adoption of IRV right away due its many advantages, including ensuring the election of a true majority, encouraging greater voter turnout, reducing negative campaigning, allowing people to vote their hopes rather than their fears by eliminating the “spoiler” factor, and saving pubic dollars by combining the primary and general election into a single contest.

Still, the commissions’ vote was a significant victory for electoral reform, their initial recommendation had been to essentially do nothing- take no action of IRV and to simply wait and see what happens in Pierce County where IRV will be used for the first time this year after a successful pubic vote. Our public testimony affirmed the fact that IRV has been used successfully around the county and around the world for decades and demonstrated broad public support for a system that offers much greater choice. The fact that IRV had more support during the Comssion’s pubic hearings than any other issue by far was recognized in their discussion last night; clearly it was what turned the tide in favor of the commission voting to give IRV more specific consideration. About 30 people testified during the 4 public hearings, including a large number of young people, and dozens wrote letters as well. Thanks much to all of you who participated!

There is much more work to be done, including educating the members of the King County Council about the merits of IRV. We gained a lot of support and educated a lot of people during the public hearing process. Let’s savor this small but significant victory and keep our poitive momentum going to have an effective citizen’s advisory group that will recommend putting IRV on the ballot in King County.

Thanks
Joe Szwaja
Vice President Instant Runoff Voting of Washignton

Binns-Swigger Loop Rd. and Archie Binns

April 24, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Archie Binns was born near Port Ludlow, but spent a good part of his life near Shelton out towards Arcadia. I didn’t notice it until now, but that area (east of Shelton) still bears the mark of Binns’ family name.

His time out in Arcadia land is detailed in “Roaring Land,” especially the chapters “Stump Farm” and “Steamboat Era.“

Binns Swigger Loop Rd., Shelton WA:

View Larger Map

I have no idea who these Swigger folks are.

What we should have done (sham nominating conventions)

April 24, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Instead of putting on sham nominating conventions across Washington State, we Dems should have done something different. Well, we shouldn’t have sued to overturn 872 in the first place.

But, we could have become more relevant on our own term type organizations, rather than forcing our way into relevancy. Rather than writing my point all over again, I’ll just quote myself:

The most blistering attack on the Top Two is that it hurts parties, and therefore hurts democracy. I’d agree that parties are good for Democracy, but the kinds of parties that are built for closed primaries are not the kinds of parties people are seeking to join. In essence, we need parties that are built for people that tried to get their friends to vote a certain way and put bumper stickers on their cars, but didn’t attend a political meeting.

As politics is becoming less traditional, moving out into the world of personal relationships, so do the parties (or at least the Democratic Party does, I don’t really care what the Republicans do).

I like the ideas of the Blue Tiger Democrats in this regard. They say the local parties should be as interested in civic engagement on the local level as they are with winning elections. The more people see the Democratic Party itself as a force for good, the way you see the Shriners or the Lions, and less as an organization that sues to overturn a popular initiative and win elections for the sake of winning elections, the better.

Granted, the Top Two primary is gone and was obviously unconstitutional. But, I would have loved to see the party that thrived under those conditions. How would you have built a party, with broad participation, if you had an open primary system?

An Obama alternate delegate from Thurston County wrote this blistering attack on us (political party types) after going through the caucus process:

And, more to the point, I was constantly on the verge of asking why a party that self-styles itself “Democratic” completely fails to choose its nominee in a democratic manner. The caucus system itself is already designed to disenfranchise more people than necessary. [While I acknowledge the limitations of a traditional primary vote, it at least has the advantage of not turning away those with disabilities (the caucus I attended was decidedly wheelchair-unfriendly), those with jobs that require their presence on Saturday mornings, and those who are not particularly interested in sitting around for several hours to cast a vote.]

…

But that’s the wrong impulse. The right response, after learning more about how fucked up the political system in this country, is to want to limit as much as possible the amount of sway political parties have. I want the Thurston Democrats and Republicans to have as much political power as the Thurston County Economic Development Council or the League of Women Voters. In other words, take the political parties out of politics. Let the people decide with as few or as many filters as they want.

Limit as much as possible the amount of sway political parties have. Local parties with as much power as the EDC or League of Women Voters.

This isn’t death, we can live and thrive in a world like that.

That’s what is happening anyway (see this link again) and the lawsuits against the Top Two are the reaction of an entrenched political bureaucracy against changing times.

People already are engaging in politics in ways that are contrary to how political parties operate. If we want to be relevant, we should stop trying to force people into closed primaries and meet them where they’re at.

Orting lost its newspaper, so they made their own

April 23, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

After an out of town owner closed down Orting’s newspaper, the community came back with their own. Orting News is a new hyperlocal news website that is filling the space left open when the Orting Gazette folded.

In addition to just being a news website, it does the right thing by letting Orting community-members produce their own news. One of those community-members is a former Gazette editor:

Longtime Editor of The Gazette, Dannie Oliveaux will be contributing articles to Orting News, with a special emphasis on Orting High School Sports.

“We asked for Community assistance on Orting News and one of the first calls we received was from Dannie.” said Rich Carr. “With everything he provided at The Gazette, his contacts with the kids and with the coaches, and his knowledge of players, schedules and what it means to the community, he raised his hand almost immediately!”

“Nominating conventions” are baloney, B.S., horse puckey

April 23, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

Thurston County Dem chair John Cusick (a great guy I don’t envy right now), explaining to one particular PCO (who passed on the email) the difference between the need to “nominate” a candidate in a contested local Dem race and why that isn’t an “endorsement.”

In reaction to the Top Two primary, the state party is forcing local organizations into a sham process so they can set up a lawsuit:

With regard to the Thurston County Democrats, this simply reaffirms our long-standing policy with regard to endorsements: we do not do them before primary elections, but we may provide campaign services support.

This does not affect the “nominating convention” meetings we have scheduled for next Monday. While endorsements are an expression of further support, nominations propose someone as a candidate. As I have continued to state, our nomination of one candidate among two we support does not in any way diminish our support of both candidates. (emphasis mine)

We must provide the name of a nominee for each county partisan position to the Washington State Democrats in order to preserve the asserted legal right of Democrats to select their nominees. If we do not do so, the State Party Chair will simply select one for us. (emphasis mine)

The candidates involved have mutually agreed to do this quickly with minimal fanfare. The nomination is simply to preserve a legal right, it will not constitute an endorsement or any other elevated form of support.

My first thought is that we don’t nominate anyone. If the state party is forcing us to make a meaningless nomination, then let them make the meaningless nomination.

These nominating conventions are a sham process to put forward an “official” Dem candidate for the ballot so we can sue to overturn Top Two after the election when that nomination was recognized.

5 Thoughts on “Project Franchise”

April 22, 2008 / Emmett O'Connell / 0 Comments

The so far succesful MyFC experiment in England is spawning other experiments, most recently Project Franchise (project runway?).

Other than a column in the NY Times, I can’t really find anything else about this group:

Enter Joe Scura, the mind behind Project Franchise, a group with a mission to buy a sports team and let the fans vote on every decision.

Yes, every decision. Next time Fox wants to advertise its hilarious new cop-and-dog buddy flick behind home plate, it may have to poll the fans.

“Something like this has been a long time coming, but the Internet has finally made it feasible,” Scura said. “Fans are more than just piggy banks/hot dog receptacles.”

For $5, fans can buy a vote and act as the collective general manager, deciding on everything from personnel to team colors.

1. Good idea not to ask for money up front. That wouldn’t have gone anywhere.

2. Pick a sport, but you’ll probably end up with baseball. Or basketball, but I hope baseball. See #4

3. No top level pro league will allow this to happen to one of their teams. Not because they’re too smart, but because they’re not smart at all. Mark Cuban won’t be able to buy the Cubs, the San Diego Padres couldn’t be given to the people of San Diego and the pro-sports cartel (really, I’m not throwing that term around) won’t let a group of thousands of anyones buy a team.

4. Think indy league baseball or the CBA. Both have a bit of a reputation and track-record. Both are kind of feeder leagues for the top levels (so you know there is talent there somewhere), but both are also independent of the controls of the top level leagues. So, they just might go for something like this. A CBA franchise in Seattle might be nice. I hear we have an arena available soon.

EDIT: Looks like they’re on this track:

We aren’t completely insane. While we’d love to raise enough money to purchase a team from the NFL, NBA, MLB, MLS, or NHL, we realize that this is a bit of a stretch. Realistically we are trying to acquire (at least a majority stake) in a minor league or semi-pro sports team (Independent Baseball, NBADL, ABA, AHL or Arena Football). These leagues offer flexibility that the big leagues don’t, and give the fans the ability to get involved for a fraction of what we already spend on fantasy football or video games. We have already had productive discussions with some of these leagues and they have been very receptive of our approach.

5. “Project Franchise” might be a nice name, but it is also ironic. See #3 again, but it refers to the cartel-like economic system that North American sports leagues operate under. Rather than being “clubs” in a league, they are “franchises” in an almost single entity. This is the system that gives the league (other owners) so much say in terms of who can actually own a franchise, making it impossible for Project Franchise to own an NBA/NHL/MLB/NFL property.